Browse
Search
Agenda - 12-03-2001-9b
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2001
>
Agenda - 12-03-2001
>
Agenda - 12-03-2001-9b
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/22/2013 12:49:16 PM
Creation date
8/29/2008 10:36:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
12/3/2001
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
9b
Document Relationships
Minutes - 20011203
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2001
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
28
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
business district and to improve safety along Chunon Street and NC 86. The <br />workgroup prioritized the seven options in order of preference: <br />1. Elizabeth Brady alignment 3, which does not cross the river, goes across <br />ridge (IF this is the least impact to the river) <br />2. Elizabeth Brady alignment 2 (averts racetrack, crosses river) <br />3. (original) Elizabeth Brady alignment 1 <br />4. Lawrence Road (with 86 connector) — but different function from above <br />5. Western bypass <br />6. No build <br />Y. When Chumm St. from 70 business to 70 bypass <br />Elizabeth Brady Road Extension should be treated as a local road, not a <br />bypass. The location of Elaabetli Brady Road is not adequate for a bypass. <br />NCDOT should extend the study area for a bypass to include the Hillsborough <br />50 -Year Water and Sewer Boundary. One option for a bypass would follow <br />the study area boundary for project U -3808. using existing roads where <br />passible and with an interchange on 1.85 east of Lawrence Road. Rao, <br />please refer to to attached EDD Transportation Wcrkgroup <br />recommendations and comments. <br />2) 85 in Orange Courov [o <br />NC 147 (Buck Dean Freeway) in Durham County — Orange County requests <br />that 1-3306 Section A and 1 -3306 Section B be divided into two separate <br />projects and programmed separately in the TIP. <br />Project planning and design for this facility is in progress. Orange County <br />requests that the development of the Major Investment Study and <br />Environmental Impact Statement for this project include assurance that the <br />project will not have detrimental land use impacts to the Orange County <br />Comprehensive Plan. Orange County is opposed to any widening of 1 -00 <br />through Orange County unless there Is a commitment by NCDOT ro provide <br />HOV andfor dedicated bus lanes. <br />COMMENTS ON OTHER TIP PROJECTS INITIATED BY NCDOT <br />1) 1305 widening of l -85t lanes and! reconnittingtion of insinithami from I- <br />4g at Hillshorouah 0 Durham County I ins: Orange County is opposed to any <br />widening of 1-95 through Orange County unless there is a commitment by <br />NCDOT to provide HOV andlor dedicated bus lanes. <br />Even though this project remains an 'UNFUNDED PROJECT", Orange <br />County requests that its staff be allowed to participate in Me planning of the <br />facility. The County is specifically interested in the following Infrastructure <br />impmvemaMa as May relate to the I -85fUS 70 Economic Development <br />District: <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.